1956 Hudson Metropolitan vs. 1996 Renault Clio

To start off, 1996 Renault Clio is newer by 40 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1956 Hudson Metropolitan. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1956 Hudson Metropolitan would be higher. At 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 1996 Renault Clio is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Renault Clio (250 HP) has 209 more horse power than 1956 Hudson Metropolitan. (41 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1996 Renault Clio should accelerate faster than 1956 Hudson Metropolitan. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Renault Clio weights approximately 840 kg more than 1956 Hudson Metropolitan. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.

Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 1996 Renault Clio (407 Nm) has 331 more torque (in Nm) than 1956 Hudson Metropolitan. (76 Nm). This means 1996 Renault Clio will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1956 Hudson Metropolitan.

Compare all specifications: